-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 14
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Chipper and perennial have copies of execute.js, and one is stale #1018
Comments
They are quite different, presumably best to leave separate? |
Yes but not for any good reason. It just looks like they have grown as they have needed to, but I see no reason, besides the annoyance of this problem, that stderr as an arg to ExecuteError (in perennial but not chipper), or The only issue I see is winston because it is used by the build server. Perhaps we can still work around that. |
And chipper prefers grunt logging? Could we wrap chipper to use winston? I definitely have a preference for the perennial version in general (with the |
Should we adopt the same policy as SimVersion, which has the primary copy in perennial and one copied to chipper on a regular basis? |
Maybe there should be a directory of code which works like this? |
Good idea! |
I'm not sure of the best directory location or name. How about: perennial/js/chipper/ ? |
I recommend to have the destination directory in chipper be named using a similar pattern. Perhaps the copy will be from |
On second thought, those names seem too awkward. It sounds like perennial/js/chipper code is intended primarily for chipper, which is not the case. Perhaps we should create a better name to unify these. A unique name (not used widely in our project) to mean "used in both perennial and chipper". Perhaps "biannual" or "dual". Or maybe perennial would have dual-source and chipper would have dual-target. Or we could use parent/child or original/copy. Maybe we'll start with dual and see how that goes. |
I moved SimVersion to dual/ and ran Launching an unbuilt simulation I could not test a chains rc release with working copy changes, so I'll commit next. This is going to span many repos since a preload path changed. I messaged Slack:
|
Sounds like @jonathanolson is on the case for this maintenance fix, so I've updated the assignees. |
Is... there something to discuss in dev meeting? Or did that just show up because I reopened the issue? I have nothing that needs discussing at dev meeting. |
Handled in the maintenance release, closing. |
…/chipper#1018" This reverts commit 7e53da76
…hetsims/chipper#1018"" This reverts commit 25cacee241319daae825fa2b863797bb4b7db43b.
Assigning the developers with the most commits on those files. How do you recommend to proceed?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: